Randomized, double-blind study of emtricitabine (FTC) plus clevudine versus FTC alone in treatment of chronic hepatitis B

Using artificial neural network and multivariate calibration methods for simultaneous spectrophotometric analysis of Emtricitabine and Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate in pharmaceutical formulation of HIV drug

Spectrophotometric analysis method based on artificial neural network (ANN), partial least squares regression (PLS) and principal component regression (PCR) models was proposed for the simultaneous determination of Emtricitabine (ETB) and Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) drug. An artificial neural network consisting of two, five, and seven layers with 2,3,5,7, and 9 neurons was trained by applying a feed forward back-propagation learning. In this method, Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) and gradient descent with momentum and adaptive learning rate back propagation (GDX) algorithms were used. Statistical parameters indicated that the ability of LM was better than GDX algorithm. Also, root mean square error (RMSE) and recovery (%) of the PLS and PCR methods showed that PLS has worked better than PCR. The proposed models were compared to the high- performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) as a reference method. Furthermore, the obtained results of the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test at the 95% confidence level represented that there was no significant difference between the proposed and reference methods.

Preclinical characterization of GLS4, an inhibitor of hepatitis B virus core particle assembly

Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-associated chronic liver diseases are treated with nucleoside analogs that target the virus polymerase. While these analogs are potent, drugs are needed to target other virus-encoded gene products to better block the virus replication cycle and chronic liver disease. This work further characterized GLS4 and compared it to the related BAY 41-4109, both of which trigger aberrant HBV core particle assembly, where the virus replication cycle occurs. This was done in HepAD38 cells, which replicate HBV to high levels. In vitro, GLS4 was significantly less toxic for primary human hepatocytes (P < 0.01 up to 100 μM), inhibited virus accumulation in the supernantant of HepAD38 cells (P < 0.02 up to 100 nM), inhibited HBV replicative forms in the liver with a significantly lower 50% effective concentration (EC50) (P < 0.02), and more strongly inhibited core gene expression (P < 0.001 at 100 to 200 nM) compared to BAY 41-4109. In vivo characterization was performed in nude mice inoculated with HepAD38 cells, which grew out as tumors, resulting in viremia. Treatment of mice with GLS4 and BAY 41-4109 showed strong and sustained suppression of virus DNA to about the same extents both during and after treatment. Both drugs reduced the levels of intracellular core antigen in the tumors. Alanine aminotransferase levels were normal. Tumor and total body weights were not affected by treatment. Thus, GLS4 was as potent as the prototype, BAY 41-4109, and was superior to lamivudine, in that there was little virus relapse after the end of treatment and no indication of toxicity.

Long-term outcome of primary non-responders to tenofovir therapy in HIV/HBV-co-infected patients: impact of HBV genotype G

AIM

To evaluate the early virological response (EVR) to combined tenofovir-lamivudine or emtricitabine regimen in HBV/HIV-co-infected patients and the long-term efficacy of tenofovir.

METHODS

In this retrospective monocentric study, among the 166 HIV/HBV-co-infected patients regularly followed from 2003 to 2008 at Bichat Claude Bernard Hospital, 61 patients had received, either de novo combination therapy with tenofovir and lamivudine or emtricitabine (group I, n = 15) or add-on tenofovir to lamivudine therapy (group II, n = 46). The HBV polymerase region was sequenced and analysed for all patients with available samples.

RESULTS

All 15 group I patients achieved EVR vs 32 (82%) of group II patients (P = 0.15). Seven adherent group II patients met criteria for primary non-response, but achieved delayed response (DR) to therapy. In these seven patients, when compared with the 39 group II patients, there was a trend to longer duration of lamivudine pre-treatment and to higher rate of lamivudine-resistant mutants; and HBV genotype-G proportion was higher (P = 0.026). No virological breakthrough occurred after a median of 46 months follow up.

CONCLUSION

In these HBV/HIV-co-infected patients, first-line HBV therapy with tenofovir and emtricitabine or lamivudine was associated with EVR. However, DR to tenofovir was observed in 15% of patients who added tenofovir to lamivudine therapy, of whom four of seven (57%) had genotype G-HBV infection. No resistance was evidenced after 46 months of therapy even in patients with DR to tenofovir. At last, a good renal safety profile of TDF was observed after a median follow-up of 4 years of therapy.

Management of chronic hepatitis B

Chronic hepatitis B continues to be a major global health burden. It accounts for a substantial impact on health care resources and finances in many parts of the world including Europe. Natural history and disease spectrum are varied, depending on when and how the infection is acquired. The chronic infective state increases patients' risk of progression to liver cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. Several treatment options are currently available, but their use depends on the stage of the patient's infection, which is influenced by both host and viral factors. The ultimate goals in hepatitis B treatment are to prevent disease progression, hepatic decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis should be referred to specialized transplant centers in a timely manner.

Combination Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis B: Current Indications

Hepatitis B infection remains a major public health problem globally and in the United States, with significant use of healthcare resources. Several therapeutic agents active against viral and host targets are currently available for its treatment. The success of combination therapy in HIV infection, which has similarities to hepatitis B in both therapeutic targets and treatment options, stimulated studies on the efficacy and safety of various combinations of available drugs in the treatment of hepatitis B infection. In this review, we analyze the current role of combination therapy in chronic hepatitis B infection.

A Review of Oral Antiretroviral Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B

Objective:

To describe the current evidence for the use of oral antiretroviral (ARV) agents in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

Data Sources:

A search from 1950 to April 2010 was conducted using the databases PubMed and MEDLINE with the search terms chronic hepatitis B, lamivudine, entecavir, adefovir, telbivudine, tenofovir, emtricitabine, clevudine, and pradefovir. The search was limited to trials conducted in humans that were published in the English language.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Studies were included if they evaluated the use of oral ARVs in patients with CHB infection who were not coinfected with hepatitis C, hepatitis D, or HIV.

Data Synthesis:

Oral ARVs have revolutionized the treatment of CHB. Studies conducted comparing ARVs have favored entecavir and tenofovir with respect to their ability to decrease hepatitis B virus DNA viral load while minimizing the development of resistance. However, low seroconversion rates, recurrent viremia when ARV therapy is discontinued, and increased resistance rates with longer treatment durations limit the benefit of oral ARVs in the treatment of CHB. Combination therapy has been a suggested solution; however, studies have yet to prove additional benefit over currently recommended monotherapy.

Conclusions:

Oral ARVs should continue to be used in the treatment of CHB; however, research is needed to define the optimal duration of therapy, evaluate the utility of combination therapy, and explore novel targets within the hepatitis B life cycle.

Antiviral treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections

While 25 compounds have been formally licensed for the treatment of HIV infection (AIDS), only seven licensed products are currently available for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection: interferon-α, pegylated interferon-α, lamivudine, adefovir (dipivoxil), entecavir, telbivudine and tenofovir (disoproxil fumarate). In contrast to the treatment of HIV infections where the individual drugs are routinely used in combination, for the treatment of chronic HBV infection the individual drugs are generally used in monotherapy. In principle, combination drug therapy should allow reducing the likelihood of drug-resistant development.

Combination treatment in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) represents an important public health problem. HBeAg-negative CHB is frequently associated with advanced liver disease and its prevalence is increasing. Monotherapy with either interferon (conventional or pegylated) or nucleoside/nucleotide analogues has its limitations. It has been suggested that a combination of these agents might increase antiviral efficacy. However, existing data do not support this hypothesis, even though combination treatment appears to reduce the risk for emergence of lamivudine resistance. Nevertheless, most existing combination studies are small, and it is possible that they have not been designed to detect significant differences between combination treatment and monotherapies. Another limitation of these studies is that, in most of them, lamivudine treatment was discontinued after 1 year, a strategy that is not followed in clinical practice. It was thought to be interesting to evaluate the combination of a short course of interferon (particularly pegylated) with the long-term administration of nucleotide or nucleoside analogues. The efficacy of combining pegylated interferon with the newer nucleotide or nucleoside analogues or of nucleotide with nucleoside analogues could also be evaluated. However, findings show that until more data are available, combination therapy cannot be recommended as first-line treatment in patients with CHB. On the other hand, add-on therapy with adefovir or tenofovir is the treatment of choice in patients who develop resistance to lamivudine. In patients with cirrhosis, a combination of lamivudine/adefovir may also be used as initial treatment; another option would be to add tenofovir in patients with an insufficient response to entecavir.

Myopathy and neuropathy associated with nucleos(t)ide analog therapy for hepatitis B

The development of clevudine as a treatment for hepatitis B was terminated recently because of case reports of myopathy. In each case, the onset of symptoms occurred between 8 and 13 months after the initiation of treatment. Electromyography and muscle biopsy confirmed the presence of myonecrosis. One report also found evidence of mitochondrial toxicity. The delayed onset and the finding of mitochondrial damage are reminiscent of fialuridine toxicity. Telbivudine has also been reported to be associated with myopathy and neuropathy, particularly when used in combination with pegylated interferon. These findings serve as a sober reminder of the lack of data on long-term safety of nucleos(t)ide analogs for hepatitis B, the importance of balancing benefits versus risks before initiating treatment, and the need for more stringent post-marketing surveillance for drug toxicities.

Benefits and risks of combination therapy for hepatitis B

In successful antiviral therapy of hepatitis B, drug combinations, particularly combinations without cross-resistance, can delay or prevent the emergence of drug-resistant mutants. Because drug-resistant mutants are archived and may limit future therapeutic options, prevention is important for long-term therapeutic efficacy. Additionally, combining drugs may achieve synergistic or additive antiviral effects compared with single drug therapy. Undesirable aspects of combination therapy include higher treatment costs and possibly lower adherence rates (due to pill number or complexity of regimen). Potentially harmful effects of combination therapy include higher rates of side effects, reduced efficacy due to drug competition, and the risk of multidrug-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV) if combination therapy is insufficient to prevent resistance. Combination therapy has been shown to reduce the rate of drug resistance in chronic hepatitis B, but only when drugs with a low barrier to resistance are used (lamivudine, adefovir). Combination therapies may achieve greater degrees of HBV DNA suppression, but this has not been associated with higher rates of seroconversion (hepatitis B e antigen or hepatitis B surface antigen) compared to single drug therapy. The benefit of combination therapy has yet to be demonstrated with agents that are associated with a high barrier to resistance (tenofovir, entecavir). The use of combination therapy is recommended in specific patient groups: those with decompensated cirrhosis, those coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and HBV who are on antiretroviral therapy, those who have undergone liver transplantation, and those with drug-resistant HBV infection. There is insufficient evidence to recommend combination therapy as first-line therapy for all patients with chronic hepatitis B.

Role of combination therapy in chronic hepatitis B

Combination therapy includes the use of two or more antivirals for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. No study has shown that combination therapy is superior to monotherapy in naive patients for achieving treatment end points, but combination appears to result in a lower incidence of resistance. Moreover, the higher-potency compounds have not yet been studied. Consideration should be given to treating lamivudine-resistant patients with combination therapy, preferably with a nucleotide analogue in conjunction with a nucleoside analogue. Combination therapy should be considered in patients with decompensated cirrhosis who are unable to achieve an undetectable viral level on monotherapy and in naive patients who still have a detectable viral level 6 to 12 months after starting therapy.

[Treatment of chronic hepatitis B]

SUMMARY

In recent years, marked progress has been made in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Several agents have been approved: interferon alpha-(IFN), pegylated interferon alpha2a (PEG-IFN alpha2a), lamivudine, adefovir, entecavir, telbivudine and recently, tenofovir. Each drug has advantages and limitations. IFN and PEG-IFN alpha2a have the advantage of inducing a sustained virologic response after a defined, limited course of treatment. However, these drugs are only effective in a minority of patients and have frequent side effects. Analogues have the advantage of being administered orally, with good safety profiles and a potent antiviral effect. However, these drugs need to be administered indefinitely since withdrawal of therapy is generally associated with reactivation, and a sustained response is uncommon except in HBeAg positive patients who develop HBe seroconversion. In case of HBe seroconversion, therapy should usually be continued for at least another 24 weeks. The efficacy of lamivudine is limited by the emergence of lamivudine-resistant HBV. Adefovir is associated with a moderate incidence of resistance but its antiviral effect is not optimal. Entecavir has shown to be more effective with a favourable safety profile and a low incidence of resistance. Telbivudine is more potent and has a lower rate of resistance than lamivudine but the resistance rate is significantly higher than other approved drugs. Tenofovir has a potent antiviral effect with a good resistance profile. The future of chronic hepatitis B therapy appears to be different drug combinations. Normally the advantage of drug combinations versus monotherapy should be additive or synergistic antiviral effects and a decrease in viral resistance. Unfortunately, there are few data available and none of the evaluated analogue combinations have been shown to be better than monotherapy. The only combination which has shown a synergistic effect is of pegylated interferon alpha2a with lamivudine. Therefore, combinations of pegylated interferon with the most potent analogues need to be evaluated. The ultimate goal of therapy is HBsAg seroconversion which is more often observed with interferon. Indeed, quantification of serum HBsAg will be a useful tool to predict the treatment outcome. More potent drugs and new combinations as well as understanding the mechanisms of viral resistance should be evaluated to improve the efficacy of treatment.

Pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety of lamivudine in hepatitis B virus infection

Lamivudine was the first nucleoside analog for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). It is well-tolerated and induces a decrease in serum HBV DNA levels associated with normalization of serum alanine aminotransferase levels. However, a sustained response with hepatitis B 'e' antigen to anti-hepatitis B e seroconversion is obtained in a smaller proportion of patients and hepatitis B surface antigen loss is exceptional. The response is maintained during therapy, and needs to be continued indefinitely in the majority of patients since withdrawal of treatment is generally followed by a rapid reappearance of the virus. However, mutations can be induced in long-term treatment.

Recent data on treatment of chronic hepatitis B with nucleos(t)ide analogues

Forty years ago in 1967, Professor Blumberg discovered the Australian Antigen, later known as the hepatitis B surface antigen, and was awarded the Nobel Prize. This discovery enables the diagnosis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and defines its epidemiology. Viral hepatitis B infection affects global health situation, and chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is particularly serious in the Asia-Pacific region. HBV vaccines created the first breakthrough in HBV prevention. Through universal HBV vaccination program for the newborns, promoted since the mid-1980s, the main route that perpetuates chronic infection from mother to child is curbed. Most children and young adults now have immunity against HBV infection. The next breakthrough comes with therapy for CHB. This prevents progression to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Standard interferon therapy with modest efficacy has been largely replaced by therapy with nuclos(t)ide analogues or pegylated interferons alfa-2a and -2b. Lamivudine was approved by the FDA USA in 1998, followed by adefovir dipivoxil in 2002, entecavir in 2005, and telbivudine in 2006. Clevudine, tenofovir, and many promising candidates are in different stages of development and clinical trial. This paper critically reviews recent data published or presented since the APASL Consensus and Guideline Update of 2005. Clinical efficacy mostly in patients with raised serum alanine aminotransferase will be analyzed.

Systematic review: combination therapies for treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND

There is a renewed interest in use of combination therapies in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) because of limitations of monotherapies.

AIM

To discuss the current status of combination therapies in treatment-naïve CHB.

METHODS

PubMed search was done using 'combination', 'sequential' and 'chronic hepatitis B' as the search terms.

RESULTS

The two most popular combination therapies include 'combination of nucleos(t)ide analogues' and 'combination of interferons and nucleos(t)ide analogues'. Combination therapies using two nucleos(t)ide analogues do not lead to higher long-term efficacy. However, addition of a nucleos(t)ide analogue with a good resistance profile to a nucleos(t)ide analogue with a lower genetic barrier to resistance decreases the risk of emergent resistance to the latter. Greater sustained virological, biochemical and seroconversion rates are observed with addition of lamivudine to conventional interferon, but pegylated-interferon monotherapy is equally effective as combination with lamivudine. Again, resistance to lamivudine is lower with its combination with interferons.

CONCLUSIONS

The answer to the question whether hepatitis B can be treated better with combination or monotherapy remains largely unknown. Additional trials are warranted of combination therapies of peginterferon and potent nucleos(t)ide analogues or therapies with the combined use of nucleos(t)ide analogues or immunomodulators.

Development of a novel mouse model to evaluate drug candidates against hepatitis B virus

Woodchuck hepatitis virus (WHV)-infected woodchucks have been used for preclinical development of drugs against hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, there is no simple in vivo model to evaluate small amounts of compounds against HBV. To develop such a model, HepAD38 cells, in which HBV replication is regulated by tetracycline (tet), were grown as subcutaneous tumours in nude mice. Mice developing viraemia were then left untreated or given tet in the drinking water. In some of the mice given tet, it was removed and the mice were injected intraperitoneally with phosphate buffer saline (PBS), lamivudine (3TC), clevudine (CLV) or tenofovir dipivoxil fumarate (TDF). Virus DNA titres were measured by real-time PCR during and after drug treatment. In water-fed and PBS-injected mice, virus titres reached approximately 10(9) copies/ml serum within 35 days of HepAD38 injection, whereas in tet-treated mice, virus titres remained at 10(4)-10(5) copies/ml. HBV DNA levels were suppressed by 3TC, TDF and CLV, with the latter two drugs showing more sustained virus suppression compared with 3TC. Combination therapy with CLV plus TDF was much more effective than either drug alone in suppressing virus titre for at least 3 weeks after the end of treatment. There was no demonstrable toxicity to HepAD38 cells in drug-treated mice. Hence, a robust tet-controlled system for HBV replication in vivo was demonstrated, validated with monotherapies against HBV and shown to be useful in assessing combination therapy. This system will be useful for preclinical assessment of small amounts of single or multiple compounds against HBV in vivo.

Antiviral treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infections: the past, the present and the future

A decade ago, standard therapy against chronic hepatitis B virus infections only consisted of lamivudine or IFN-alpha. Treatment with lamivudine and IFN has been compounded by, respectively, the emergence of drug-resistant virus strains and the appearance of serious side effects. In the last 10 years, hepatitis B treatment has made much progress. Several treatments are now licensed for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B and others are under development. Here, we provide an overview of the potential and mode of action of anti-HBV agents that are currently available, and/or may become available in the near future. Foremost among these newer compounds are adefovir dipivoxil, entecavir and telbivudine.

Interferon and lamivudine vs. interferon for hepatitis B e antigen-positive hepatitis B treatment: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

To compare interferon monotherapy with its combination with lamivudine for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive hepatitis B treatment.

METHODS

Two independent researchers identified pertinent randomized controlled trials. The trials were evaluated for methodological quality and heterogeneity. Rates of sustained virological and biochemical responses, and HBeAg clearance and seroconversion were used as primary efficacy measures. Quantitative meta-analyses were conducted to assess differences between groups for conventional and pegylated interferon, and overall.

RESULTS

Greater sustained virological, biochemical and seroconversion rates were observed with addition of lamivudine to conventional [odds ratio (OR)=3.1, 95% confidence intervals (CI) (1.7-5.5), P<0.0001, OR=1.8, 95% CI (1.2-2.7), P=0.007 and OR=1.8, 95% CI (1.1-2.8), P=0.01 respectively], although not pegylated [OR=1.1, 95% CI (0.5-2.3), P=0.8, OR=1.0, 95% CI (0.7-1.3), P=0.94, and OR=0.9, 95% CI (0.6-1.2), P=0.34 respectively] interferon-alpha, with no significant affect on HBeAg clearance rates [OR=1.6, 95% CI (0.9-2.7), P=0.09, and OR=0.8, 95% CI (0.6-1.1), P=0.26 respectively]. Excluding virological response (P<0.001), pegylated interferon monotherapy and conventional interferon and lamivudine combination therapy were similarly efficacious (P>0.05), with the former studied in harder to treat patients, as evidenced by the superior virological response observed with conventional as compared with pegylated interferon monotherapy (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In comparable populations, pegylated interferon monotherapy is likely to be equally or more efficacious than conventional interferon and lamivudine combination therapy, thus constituting the treatment of choice, with no added benefit with lamivudine addition. However, when conventional interferon is used, its combination with lamivudine should be considered.

Lamivudine and interferon versus lamivudine monotherapy for HBeAg-positive hepatitis B treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials

The suboptimal outcomes of current chronic hepatitis B treatments have prompted the notion of combination therapy as a means of augmenting the therapeutic response. In this study, investigators compared lamivudine monotherapy versus its combination with conventional or pegylated interferon-alpha, pooling data from all pertinent randomized controlled studies into the meta-analysis. The studies were evaluated for methodologic quality and heterogeneity. Rates of sustained virologic and biochemical responses and of hepatitis B e antigen clearance and seroconversion were used as primary efficacy measures. Quantitative metaanalyses were conducted to assess differences between groups for conventional and pegylated interferon, and overall. Analysis yielded greater sustained virologic, biochemical, and seroconversion rates with the addition of conventional (odds ratio [OR]=4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.2-9.4, P<.001; OR=2.1, 95% CI=1.3-3.2, P=.002; and OR=2.6, 95% CI=1.4-4.8, P=.001, respectively) and pegylated (OR=2.0, 95% CI=1.1-3.6, P=.02; OR=1.8, 95% CI=1.3-2.6, P<.001; and OR=1.6, 95% CI=1.1-2.3, P=.03, respectively) interferon-alpha to lamivudine, with the former also yielding greater hepatitis B e antigen clearance rates (OR=2.6, 95% CI=1.3-5.2, P=.008). As previous studies suggested that pegylated interferon monotherapy and its combination with lamivudine were comparable, the use of this combination is not justified. In contrast, when conventional interferon-a is used, its combination with lamivudine should be considered.

Chronic hepatitis B: a global health problem requiring coherent worldwide treatment strategies

Chronic hepatitis B virus infection, a major cause of end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma, is a worldwide health concern. While the past two decades have brought major advances in the availability of treatments to help delay or prevent these outcomes, treatment of chronic hepatitis B remains a serious challenge, not least due to the ability of the virus to remain in hepatocyte nuclei as a source of potential reactivation-hence the term chronic hepatitis B infection. This article reviews the current treatments available and suggests a framework for a rational approach to managing the disease.

The management of HIV and hepatitis B coinfection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coinfection with HIV and hepatitis B virus has a significant impact on the natural history of hepatitis B disease with faster rates of progression to cirrhosis and end stage liver disease. An increasing number of hepatitis B virus active drugs are now available, many of which have dual anti-HIV activity. This review highlights the most important recent developments in the management of HIV and hepatitis B virus coinfection.

RECENT FINDINGS

Natural history studies continue to confirm the increased rate of liver-related mortality in coinfected individuals and the importance of hepatocellular carcinoma in this population. The most recent studies of adefovir and tenofovir in open label use in coinfected individuals are discussed and new data on the activity of emtricitabine, entecavir and pegylated interferon are presented. Strategies for use of these new options for anti-hepatitis B virus therapy in coinfected individuals are discussed.

SUMMARY

Prevention of end stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma in the coinfected population is vital and the increasing availability of drugs with potent anti-hepatitis B activity is encouraging. Appropriate diagnosis and monitoring of hepatitis B, coupled with better understanding of the mechanisms of drug resistance, will enable clinicians to manage coinfection more effectively.

Experiences on antiviral treatment for chronic viral B and C hepatitis patients in Hungary. 1998–2004

Az utolsó évtizedben számos multicentrikus, randomizált vizsgálat bizonyította az előrehaladást a krónikus vírushepatitisek kezelésében. Ugyanakkor csak korlátozott számú és ellentmondásos adatokat közöltek az antivirális terápia reális értékéről a mindennapos rutin klinikai gyakorlatában. Cél: Retrospektív felmérést végeztünk a terápia hatékonyságának megállapítására krónikus B- és C-hepatitisben, egy 7 éves periódus alatt kezelt országos populációban. Emellett bemutatjuk még egy hazai prospektív vizsgálat néhány adatát is. Módszerek: 220 krónikus B-hepatitises beteget kezeltünk, közülük 112 standard interferon-, 23 pegilált interferon-, 85 lamivudin-terápiában részesült, akikben a HbeAg-szerokonverzió és/vagy HBV-DNS-negatívvá válás arányát vizsgáltuk. A retrospektív elemzésben szereplő 2442 krónikus C-hepatitises közül 333 standard interferon-monoterápiát, 1122 standard interferon + ribavirin kombinációt és 987 pegilált interferon + ribavirin-kezelést kapott. A prospektív vizsgálatban 69 HCV1-beteg pegilált interferon α-2a + ribavirin terápiában részesült 6–12 hónapon át. A tartós virológiai válasz mellett vizsgáltuk a kedvező kimenetel prediktorait és a mellékhatások előfordulását. Eredmények: Krónikus B-hepatitisben a standard interferon 31%-os, a pegilált interferon 30%-os, a lamivudin 31–33%-os tartós vírusnegativitáshoz vezetett. Krónikus C-hepatitisben a tartós virológiai válasz aránya az interferon-monoterápiával észlelt 13%-ról a pegilált interferon + ribavirin mellett 31%-ra nőtt, a prospektív vizsgálatban ez 48% volt. A jó prognózis prediktora a rapid (4 hetes) és a korai (12 hetes) virológiai válasz, a női nem, az életkor, BMI és az adherencia volt. A betegek 9%-ában fordult elő mellékhatás, leggyakrabban cytopenia, haemolysis és depresszió. Következtetés: A krónikus B-hepatitisszel ellentétben, a hepatitis C-vírusinfekció kezelésének effektivitása hazánkban is fokozatosan javult. A mindennapi gyakorlat országos adatai azonban elmaradnak a prospektív vizsgálat sikerességétől. A jövőben hatékonyabb terápiás stratégiák szükségesek, beleértve az individualizált dozírozást és az új antivirális szerek alkalmazását.

New and emerging treatment of chronic hepatitis B

Conventional treatment of chronic hepatitis B with interferon alfa-2b, lamivudine, and adefovir is limited by low rates of sustained hepatitis B virus DNA suppression and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion, increasing rates of drug resistance to the oral agents, and poor tolerability of interferon. Recently several promising new antiviral agents have emerged that possess potent antiviral effects, less toxicity, and have little or no risk of drug resistance. Two new agents, entecavir and peginterferon alfa-2a, have received recent approval by regulatory authorities in the United States and several other countries for the treatment of adults with chronic hepatitis B. In large phase III clinical trials, these agents have demonstrated superior efficacy over lamivudine in both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients. Drug resistance occurs at a low rate in lamivudine-refractory patients treated with entecavir or is, to date, nonexistent in nucleoside-naïve patients treated with entecavir and all patients receiving peginterferon. In addition, several novel agents in clinical development, such as emtricitabine, clevudine, telbivudine, valtorcitabine, and tenofovir, have shown promising clinical profiles in patients with chronic hepatitis B. This review summarizes the recent clinical studies of these new agents and discusses the implications of these data for the management of chronic hepatitis B.

Antiviral therapy and resistance with hepatitis B virus infection

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is still the most common cause of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver cirrhosis world wide. Recently, however, there has been quite dramatic improvement in the understanding of HBV associated liver disease and its treatment. It has become clear that high viral replication is a major risk factor for the development of both cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Early studies have shown lamivudine lowers the risk of HBV associated complications. There are currently three nucleos(t)ides licensed, in addition to interferon, and there are more drugs coming to the market soon. Interferon or its pegylated counterpart are still the only options for treatment with defined end points, while nucleos(t)ides therapy is used mostly for long term treatment. Combination therapies have not been shown to be superior to monotherapy in naïve patients, however, the outcome depends on how the end point is defined. Interferon plus lamivudine achieves a higher viral suppression than either treatment alone, even though Hbe-seroconversion was not different after a one year treatment. HBV-genotypes emerge as relevant factors, with genotypes "A" and "B" responding relatively well to interferon, achieving up to 20% HBsAg clearance in the case of genotype "A". In addition to having a defined treatment duration, interferon has the advantage of lacking resistance selection, which is a major drawback for lamivudine and the other nucleos(t)ides. The emergence of resistance against adefovir and entecavir is somewhat slower in naïve compared to lamivudine resistant patients. Adefovir has a low resistance profile with 3%, 9%, 18%, and 28% after 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively, while entecavir has rarely produced resistance in naïve patients for up to 3 years.

Combination therapy for chronic hepatitis B: simultaneous or sequential?

Various regimens of combination or sequential therapy using nucleoside/nucleotide analogues (NAs) and interferon-alfa (IFN-alpha) have been tried for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. To date, combination therapy of two NAs and of IFN-alpha and NAs fails to achieve extra viral suppression. Sequential therapy with lamivudine followed by IFN-alpha seems to have better sustained virologic response. However, the long-term beneficial effect of using this approach remains to be defined.

Clevudine: a potent inhibitor of hepatitis B virus in vitro and in vivo

Clevudine (CLV) is a nucleoside analog of the unnatural L-configuration that has potent anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) activity in vitro and in vivo with a favorable toxicity profile in all species tested. In cell culture, CLV is readily phosphorylated to the corresponding 5'-triphosphate form of the compound. The mechanism of action of CLV involves the inhibition of the HBV polymerase by CLV 5'-triphosphate. In vivo efficacy studies performed in the duck and woodchuck models showed marked, rapid inhibition of virus replication and no significant toxicity. In the woodchuck model, there was a dose-dependent delay in viral recrudescence and a reduction or loss of covalently closed circular DNA. In Phase II clinical studies, CLV was well tolerated and exhibited potent antiviral activity at all doses investigated. In Phase III studies in both hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and -negative patients, CLV 30 mg administered once daily demonstrated potent antiviral efficacy and significant biochemical improvement after only 24 weeks of therapy. These effects were sustained in a significant portion of the patients when therapy was stopped after 6 months with no viral rebound occurring in approximately 3 and 16% in HBeAg-positive and -negative patients, respectively. There have been no significant safety or tolerance issues associated with the drug in these studies. Future studies will investigate the safety and tolerance of CLV 30 mg given once daily over 48 weeks and longer.

The "return" of hepatitis B

There has been a significant advance in the treatment of chronic Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and the following drugs were approved for therapy: Conventional interferon (IFN), pegylated interferon alfa-2a (PEG IFN alpha2a), lamivudine, adefovir and entecavir. Compared to nucleoside analogues IFN induces higher rates of sustained remission and HBsAg loss. Conventional IFN in lower doses (1, 5-3 MIU) tiw for 4-6 mo has similar efficacy in comparison to "standard IFN therapy". Longer IFN treatment is a significant factor for long-term remission in HBeAg-negative CHB, but the higher actual IFN dose is not such a factor. PEG IFN is superior to conventional IFN. There is no significant difference between PEG IFN alpha2a at doses 90 mcg/wk and 180 mcg/wk in HBeAg-positive patients. These results provide a rational for further clinical trials with lower doses PEG IFN alpha2a given in prolonged course as maintenance or intermittent treatment. Serious new problems arose after the introduction of nucleoside/nucleotide analogues in clinical practice. The most important ones are drug-resistance and the high rates of relapse after treatment discontinuation. Therapy should only be recommended if the expected benefit exceeds significantly the abstain from treatment. The choice of therapy should take into account the patient's age, co-morbidity, severity of liver disease and the risk of drug-resistance. New antivirals significantly suppress HBV-replication, but have no effect on cccDNA in hepatocytes, and after the treatment discontinuation viral relapses occurs. At the present level of knowledge it is impossible "to eradicate the virus" The realistic treatment goal is to achieve durable response by clearance of HBeAg, sustained decrease of serum HBV DNA levels, normalization of ALT, improvement of liver histology and stopping of liver fibrogenesis. The competition between IFN based therapy and nucleoside or nucleotide analogues still remains. IFN can cure the liver disease while nucleotide analogues only suppress the viral replication during therapy and can reduce the liver fibrosis. Treatment should be prolonged for 24-mo or longer by using maintenance or intermittent treatment course with the lowest effective IFN and PEG IFN doses. Nucleoside/nucleotide analogues are a promising treatment option, but additional data for treatment duration and long-term post-treatment outcome are necessary.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis B: efficacy of current drugs and prospects for the future

Chronic hepatitis B is an important clinical problem often leading to severe complications. In this review, the results obtained in the last few years with the use of current drugs, such as interferon and nucleo(t)side analogues, are summarized and the problems of obtaining a sustained remission, which is only achieved in a small number of patients, are discussed. The new approaches, such as the use of combinations of drugs, to optimize long-term tolerable treatment are also considered.

Hepatitis B in liver transplant recipients

1. The use of low-dose immunosuppressive therapy along with pre- and posttransplantation nucleos(t)ide therapy and posttransplantation hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) has yielded marked improvements in survival. 2. Lamivudine (Epivir-HBV), adefovir (Hepsera), entecavir (Baraclude), tenofovir (Viread), emtricitabine (Emtriva), and the combination drugs tenofovir + emtricitabine (Truvada) and abacavir + lamivudine (Epzicom) are effective nucleos(t)ide antiviral agents that, in some cases, may help reverse liver disease sufficiently to avoid transplant. 3. In posttransplantation patients, virus suppression with some combination of HBIG and the nucleos(t)ide agents may prevent graft loss and death or the need for a second transplant. 4. In both the pre- and posttransplantation setting, the goal of hepatitis B virus management is complete virus suppression. 5. The use of low-dose intramuscular HBIG is evolving, with studies showing that dosing and cost can be reduced by 50-300% with a customized approach. 6. Elimination of HBIG from the treatment paradigm is currently under evaluation and may be possible with the use of newer medications that have no or low resistance rates. 7. Although there is growing evidence that some types of combination therapy may decrease the chance that drug resistance will develop and increase the likelihood of long-term success in preventing graft loss and death, additional research will be required to determine which combinations will work well in the long term, and which will not.